Top Mud Sites Forum - View Single Post

Burr · 12-14-2004, 01:29 AM

In muds with high magic or advanced technology (i.e., most muds), the exoticness of the world and character types means the needs of a character do not necessarily follow Maslow's Hierarchy in predictable ways, or even at all. For this reason, I take "avatar" to potentially include more than one character, and possibly even an OOC persona, such that if one character died, the avatar would not necessarily die as well. A broader definition of "avatar" allows for a more accurate generalization across muds. Moreover, it is useful because an avatar, as I define it, can take into account things like whether or not a hunger system is implemented, whereas a character normally experiences hunger whether or not we actually perceive this experience. Characters have life beyond the mud via the IC nature of the world. Players have life beyond the mud via real life. Avatars fill the intersection between the two. Also because of this distinction, if a player moves to a different mud, the avatar does not follow, but rather a new avatar is created.

The question then becomes whether or not avatars contain any sphere of perception or influence which is not shared with the player or the character. If not, then it is difficult to say an avatar has needs of its own.

I think we generally expect our characters to have a "will to live" not as a luxury but as a duty. After all, how often do players complain that their character is still alive? (Okay, I've actually seen that happen, but I'm pretty sure it was an exception to the rule.) When we log out for a few days, we generally assume that our characters keep on carrying out daily activities. That the story is hidden from us doesn't mean it didn't keep on going.

An avatar, on the other hand, is usually expected to disappear while we are gone, unless we are simply "afk". For instance, I wouldn't want my topmudsites user id to keep posting to the forum without my guidance; nor would I even want it saying I am here when I am not. This might change if avatars could be trusted to perform useful functions even while the player is away (e.g., advanced bots). In such a case, an avatar truly might take on a life of its own and develop needs of its own.

As to self-realization, a character can achieve his or her full potential and still leave a player unsatisfied. But I think it is each player's goal to create a character whose potential also meets some potential in the player. Even the darkest of characters may express a self-concept that a player enjoys knowing is available but unchosen (yet), a kind of self-realization by way of contrast.

The avatar, then, may represent the full potential for self-realization that a player can gain from a potential mud.

12-14-2004, 01:29 AM	#5
Burr Member Join Date: Apr 2002 Posts: 123	In muds with high magic or advanced technology (i.e., most muds), the exoticness of the world and character types means the needs of a character do not necessarily follow Maslow's Hierarchy in predictable ways, or even at all. For this reason, I take "avatar" to potentially include more than one character, and possibly even an OOC persona, such that if one character died, the avatar would not necessarily die as well. A broader definition of "avatar" allows for a more accurate generalization across muds. Moreover, it is useful because an avatar, as I define it, can take into account things like whether or not a hunger system is implemented, whereas a character normally experiences hunger whether or not we actually perceive this experience. Characters have life beyond the mud via the IC nature of the world. Players have life beyond the mud via real life. Avatars fill the intersection between the two. Also because of this distinction, if a player moves to a different mud, the avatar does not follow, but rather a new avatar is created. The question then becomes whether or not avatars contain any sphere of perception or influence which is not shared with the player or the character. If not, then it is difficult to say an avatar has needs of its own. I think we generally expect our characters to have a "will to live" not as a luxury but as a duty. After all, how often do players complain that their character is still alive? (Okay, I've actually seen that happen, but I'm pretty sure it was an exception to the rule.) When we log out for a few days, we generally assume that our characters keep on carrying out daily activities. That the story is hidden from us doesn't mean it didn't keep on going. An avatar, on the other hand, is usually expected to disappear while we are gone, unless we are simply "afk". For instance, I wouldn't want my topmudsites user id to keep posting to the forum without my guidance; nor would I even want it saying I am here when I am not. This might change if avatars could be trusted to perform useful functions even while the player is away (e.g., advanced bots). In such a case, an avatar truly might take on a life of its own and develop needs of its own. As to self-realization, a character can achieve his or her full potential and still leave a player unsatisfied. But I think it is each player's goal to create a character whose potential also meets some potential in the player. Even the darkest of characters may express a self-concept that a player enjoys knowing is available but unchosen (yet), a kind of self-realization by way of contrast. The avatar, then, may represent the full potential for self-realization that a player can gain from a potential mud.